WHEN the Jordanians withdrew from the Old City in East Jerusalem at the height of the 1967 War, allowing Israeli paratroopers to occupy Al-Aqsa and Dome of the Rock, the
first thing that the unit chief communication officer did was to raise the national flag.
This drew the immediate ire of then defence minister, Moshe Dayan, who exclaimed: "Do you want to set the Middle East on fire?"
In stark contrast, today's Zionist State of Israel is led by politicians who are raring to openly realise the vision for a Greater Israel, which only sets the stage for another regional conflict but
one in which the dynamics are no longer the same as during the four Arab-Israeli wars.
The fact that a flag rally/procession — only cancelled at the last minute — could even be scheduled to pass through the Old City yesterday, something unthinkable before, is but a microcosm of the changing attitudes of the Zionists who have been becoming more blatant in their design and intention over the decades.
To its credit, Hamas only issued a stern warning in relation to the proposed march — since it would have been a gross transgression, yet again, of the sensitivities of Muslims worldwide.
Israel enjoys special treatment from the United States, which has a systematic pattern of vetoing and blocking the United Nations Security Council resolutions as well as indirectly by way of abstention.
According to data from the UN, the US has vetoed at least 53 such resolutions from 1972 onwards (source: https://www.un.org/depts/dhl/res-guide/scact_veto_table_en.htm).
While it might sound almost incredible, the only solution to all of this is for the Old City of Jerusalem to come under a joint-UN and Multinational Islamic Defence Force peacekeeping force.
This would require cooperation with Hamas, now at the forefront of the Palestinian liberation cause.
Even if Israel would never ever concede to the above proposal, it would still have to talk to Hamas, come what may. In an EMIR Research article, Ethnic cleansing and apartheid — Israel and Netanyahu are on the wrong side of history (May 17, 2021), it was pointed out that Hamas isn't a terrorist organisation at all, but a resistance movement.
The newly published book, Engaging the World: The Making of Hamas' Foreign Policy by Daud Abdullah (Afro-Middle East Centre/AMEC, January 2021) confirms the intense struggle by Hamas to adopt a moderate stance in its external attitude and relations, for example, on the basis of the principle of non-interference in the affairs of other countries.
Its sole focus and aim is the liberation of Palestine.
Otherwise, should the Zionists refuse to reach out and negotiate, Hamas can only have one option and that's to advocate for a one-state solution but without a long-term truce as the basis, in return for the right of return of refugees to be recognised and allowed for.
In Hamas: The Islamic Resistance Movement by Beverley Milton-Edwards and Stephen Farrell (Polity, 2010), the book describes how Hamas was born out of poverty, misery and desperation — something that the mass media, particularly in the West, rarely highlights.
The following paragraph is worth quoting: "Those Palestinians had come to believe that, after years of negotiations with Israel without any deal that would offer them hope of statehood and independence, there was little point in investing further political will in a process making their living conditions worse, not better".
Recall that the late 1960s and 1970s wereaperiod where resistance organisations, such as the Palestinian Liberation Organisation and Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, were involved in hijackings and assassinations of Zionists abroad.